Ok, thanks.

Fat lot of good that will do him though

Regardless of how good Jean Todt would be as President he comes with too much baggage which will hinder any progress he tries to make.
Support from Mosley will alienate him from most fans but probably get him the support he needs from all those second rate associations in Africa and the like.

More of the same to look forward to

...says the voice of a tiny minority.

You shouldn't marginalise twohundredthandsixtynine (269) Autosport posters, they are a very important factor in this election.
Now where's that online petition boys.

You appear to have so much contempt for your fellow BB posters, and yet you still hang around...

au contraire I've nothing but the utmost respect for my fellow BB posters, especially for those with a firm grasp of reality

Maybe we could just let Jean Todt toss a coin to decide who gets the title?

Doesn't sound like it from your previous post.

Vatanen for fair rules and judgements. :up
Todt can go back to Ferrari garage.

Guess it depends on whether you support Ferrari or a sport called Formula 1.

Lovely Post Pascal...

I heartily agree with your assessment as well.
A bit of transparency would go a long way these days too
Tidy up the tarnished reputation that has made the office a laughing stock.... and then take it from there.


Jp

Yes, I think he would as well. I'm just not sure he would at this point in time. In 4 years time, when things have hopefully cooled down under a gentler hand, I think people will say its time for some sorting out again, and Todt could be just the person.

In a way it would be nice if we could talk about a team, rather than one individual - Vatanen and Todt working together could be a very powerful combination...

Just my opinion but I say neither one.

Vatanen doesn't seem to have the overall competence. Todt on the other hand has but his history with Ferrari would always come up as a thorn in the side from time to time.

I always felt that Alain Prost would be the perfect candidate. What he doesn't know about other forms of racing, he would learn quickly. Because he's a very smart, intelligent and a laid back person that rarely gets emotional. Alain would be perfect. He would be my top choice but I wonder if he would be interested.

I doubt his management skills. His short efforts in running a team were not good. Even Lauda would be better, who ran an airline, drove for several teams including Ferrari, and has remained in contact with all the facets of F1. But when I look at Todt, I see someone of immense managerial capability. I don't see his understanding of the way Ferrari behaves and thinks as a negative, I see it as a strength.

It surprises me though that Todt would do it for nothing, it was usually been a voluntary position. I think it should not be.

They were both Peugeot guys at one point, but the nod goes to Vatanen, despite his crazy ass views on climate!

Maybe, but a lot of people will see the potential for bias creeping into his decisions. A lot of people think the FIA favour Ferrari more or less indiscriminately, and having someone who until recently was closely associated with Ferrari is not going to do much for that.

I think the bias to Ferrari has not been indiscriminate. I think its been quite discriminate! I also think that direct intervention from the FIA has gone down to race level and pre and post race interventions.

Concerning Ferrari, FOTA believes that they are the centre of F1. So does Ronald Walker, who is/was the leader of the Melbourne Events group, who arranged for such things as the Commonwealth Games and the GP at Melbourne. He recently told Bernie, that should Ferrari go, that Melbourne would likely not continue with the GP. It sounded as if not having Ferrari might have broken the contract between Bernie and the Melbourne GP organization. One might say that Max gave so much to Ferrari, that the creature he created, ended up turning against him.

But all that is irrelevant now IMO. That Todt knows all of what went on in biases aiding Ferrari, is a good thing IMO. Because he would be aware of what damage - or benefits - to the competition that such a bias might create.

I recall that in Australia, our Labour Government appointed a judge who was very pro labour, to become the Governor General, his name was John Kerr. The same man dismissed the person who appointed him, the Prime Minister Gough Whitlam, and his Government which had appointed him as Governor General. When he became Governor General, John Kerr ran the position according to its job description, and he cast aside his previous alliances. IMO the same would be the case with most leaders. In much of industry, leaders go from one organization to another's, and they act in the interests of their new employer. Todt would do the same IMO - he'd act for the FIA and according to its aims, just as he did at Peugot and at Ferrari.

I can't think of anyone who knows more about Formula than he does, who is still fit enough to lead. One might argue Ron Dennis, but And I bet that if Luca fought Todt, Luca would be well aware that Todt would carry out what he planned - because that has been his record. If the leader of the FIA is weak, then IMO F1 would suffer.

What IMO is needed (of course) is a means to remove a corrupt or bad leader. It seems that the FIA may not easily be able to do that. Another problem is, how does the F1 community have effect on the FIA? Especially if the F1 community is not united (which is its typical state). And what if it is simply not interested? An example of such issues was when the FIA gave away its future income streams from races. The way that process was conducted was an illegitimate act. But most of the F1 teams could not have cared less. While circumstances with F1 teams have changed somewhat, that is all irrelevant IMO.

The concern should be with the future rather than the past. And one could argue, that it was Todt who ripped of Max, not that other way around. Who best to administer F1, than someone who knows exactly how all the teams work, how the sponsors work, how the bosses work, even most of the key people, how the stewards work, and how the rules are written, administered, and how to step around them? I want someone who not only knows the industry, but who gets things done, and is known for doing so. Who is respected by those to who he may provide leadership.

same here

LOL with a bit of modification that bit can be used in Jean Todt's campaign in the next few months.

But I agree very much with your sentiments, Jean Todt has been an exemplary leader throughout his career.
One to get the job done for the organisation that employs him no matter what. I for one would be very much disappointed if he shows any bias for (or against) Ferrari or any team for that matter.

There are big challenges ahead for a new FIA president such as the uneasy situation between sport and mobility and the relationship FIA vs F1, to name a few.
There would imo be no better candidate to face those challenges and to create a better and stronger FIA in the next few years than Jean Todt.

To be fair to Ari Vatanen, he might be a good FIA president too.
But I think the challenge for Ari Vatanen will not be to convince people that he can be a good FIA president but he'll have to convince people that he can be a better FIA president than Jean Todt.

That sounds just ridiculous. If Todt is the FIA president then why would he still be listening to Mosley. HE IS THE PRESIDENT!!!!!!!! not Mosley.

You don't see that as a problem?

People voting 'other' just to spite someone when they don't know a thing about the ability of the other?

Thats real smart.

It seems that people here need a reminder that being fair and balanced in the best interest of the sport wasn't a major requirement of Todt's role as Ferrari teamboss; his task was to make them win as much as possible. Job well done, in my book.

(Just in case: I prefer Vatanen as Fia president as well, but for other reasons than most people here.)

Niether man has held a post like this so we really don't know for sure how they will actually do..that said. Actually Vatanen is the closest of the two as he has held a post in the Eurpean union.


My objection is I am listening to what the two men say they will do. Vatanen is clearly disgusted with how F1 and the FIA have been run for the last 16 yrs. It has seen the demise of many of the great races in f1, loss of several historic teams, has damaged the reputation by political scandle..many of which have invovled the FIA it self, has put in rules that have decreased on track racing (many of which have now been completely reversed -Fuel stops, grooved tires, etc), has almost killed WRC, has basically killed sportscar and international touring car.....

Todt says he wants more of the same and to build on what Mosely has done. Vatanen says he wants a change. I don't like any of the stuff above so I think Vatanen is the best choice. IF the FIA wants to continue to kill of world wide motorsport and have scandle every week, then they should, by all means, vote in Todt.

Todt could well be paying lip service to Max Mosley and his legacy in order to have a smooth election campaign and an easy victory. Plenty of opportunity to change things once he's in the job. Well, if he's such a politician as is being claimed it'll be easy for him won't it?

Todt has been doing this work, management, for most of his life actually and very good at it according to his resume. Anyone can get into Government, just shout the right things loud enough and certainly is a ticket if your famous to boot - it's what you do when your there that counts.

We are all disgusted with the FIA - can we run the show better? Doubtful, asking the right questions doesn't mean you got the answers.

I would counter some other of your post with - Turkey is the best track far excelling many 'lost' tracks IMO and Brawn is a class act far beyond what Tyrell ever achieved in it's later years along with the embarrassment Lotus became.

Scandal? You have no proof that Todt will create scandals and you have nothing tangible on what "changes" Ari will make - in fact sounds very Politician like doesn't it - "rally the people, we must have change", what change and for whom?

Better than the multiple drivers championships and constructors championship that Tyrrell achieved?

Sounds like a Star Wars movie now.

My apologies Rob, I was totally distracted and posted thinking I had finished my sentence.

Try this one - Brawn is a class act far beyond what Tyrell ever achieved in it's later years along with the embarrassment Lotus became.

We can only decide on what the man says...not what his intent 'might' be.

He says he wants more of what Mosley has done....the fact that Mosley has said he would prefer him is enough for me to say no. We need nothing similar to what the FIA has become.

At least he tried and pushed ahead with his own team. You can't fault him for trying. So many greats never even tried to do it.

Lauda would be a disaster, especially for Ferrari and us fans. He simply hates us these days. I don't want Todt because I understand where fans of other teams come from. But please, not Lauda. It would be ludicrous. Besides, running a small airline and failing is even worse than not being able to keep a F1 team on the grid.

If you are disgusted then how can you support someone who is telling you right now he is going to give you more of the same? Are you then going to be suprsied when it turns into Mosley part 2.

Spa and Suzuka are both better than Turkey. Canada was basically sold out every year and usually provided a surpising outcome from the race. The Old german venue was one of the few places that F1 cars could strech thier legs to the point were real outbraking could occur...now made shorter and now no one cares.

IMO, these pale in comparison to what Mosely has done to WRC where there is basicaly only 3 real teams left where there once were 8 high quality manufacturers and there continues to be unrest (recent engine rule reversal), to touring cars where the best racing is now done in German and UK local because of the FIA governance, the shambles that sportscars continues to be in and the fact we were within days of killing F1 as a racing series.

Todt says he wants more of this..NO THANKS!. Todt represents by his own statements of more of the same. It is time for a change...virtually everyone sees that this is needed. Vatanen has shown he is an able leader and can function in a politically charged position. He knows motorsports and was actually much more successful as a competitor than Mosely ever was. He is from outside the F1 world which suggests he will no be myopic to F1 only. He has NO recent strong connections to any current motorsports team or series meaning that he is more likely to be less bias and he is NOT INDORSED by Mosely which, given the recent buckets of crap we have had to endure from Mosely, IMHO is a great thing.

Vatanen.

FIA != strictly F1.

The perennial accusations about Ferrari being in FOM/F1/FIA's back pocket is another reason why Todt shouldn't be involved.

- MY BOLD
Sorry, you're on the wrong site Vic. This isn't ferrarifan.com
Oh, that's right a bias isn't a bias when it's for Ferrari, it's just correct thinking! And politically mandated.

I think some people would do well to credit the members of the FIA and WMSC with some intelligence. They are not all sheep who will do and say everything Mosley tells them to. They didn't all vote for Mosey over spankgate and they certainly don't all support him now. Only 2 weeks ago the senate asked Mosley, under pressure from the manufacturers, for him to step away from F1 now and not to stand for the presidency in October... Meanwhile some may actually care more about the health of the FIA and some may be planning to step away. I suspect the manufacturers, a powerful global group, will be doing an awful lot of lobbying of their own to get their man in. Its far from automatic that Mosley will shoe-horn his preferred successor in - particularly given the current 'standing' of the FIA through global media as well as Mosley's own reputation.

Todt is a good bet, but its far from certain. Would like to know who the 'manufacturers' candidate will be.

Edit. Ps, I'm massively anti Mosley, but would not be against Todt as president. FOTA are still going to get there way, whoever is in charge. They are the act and they are the money.

Why did you ignore my dig at Jean? I tried to show why Lauda would be a terrible choice by showing how fans of other teams feel. I don't want Jean. Do you want Lauda? I want Alain!

The problem with Todt is his Ferrari background.
For some people he would be always "under investigation"

Vatanen is perfectly neutral.

We could waste lots of time here discussing airlines, and how tough they are to run! I agree about Lauda though, although if he was the President, I doubt his current bias against Ferrari would stay. Because Ferrari is a key element to F1. And with Lauda's German broadcasting, IMO the ratings would improve by being critical of Ferrari. But IMO Lauda is way passed it - his stint running Jaguar showed that he was perhaps not professional enough. You don't have to be that in the media. Lauda's driving of the Jag. showed that his claims about the cars being easy to drive was not so accurate, and he also had forgotten that at his age things had changed afterall.

But IMO Prost is even more in the same boat as Lauda. If I were to scale the Key Success Factors in being a leader of the FIA, then recent professional experience in a pressure environment would be high on my list.

There is an autosport news report, which quotes Ari criticizing Mosley for stating Todt's case. Unfortunately for Ari, he claimed that Ferrari did not want Todt to be president. But Ferrari have not been pro or anti anybody. So Ari's lying. If that is the colors of Ari, do we want someone like that?

Sounds like he should fit right in then...

Seriously, I think he's more likely to have betrayed a confidence rather than lied about Ferrari's opinion. Of course, that's hardly a glowing recommendation for a job that needs good diplomacy skills.

Ari probably can not lie due to his religious beliefs which makes him either mistaken or of inside knowledge.

Wheres your proof that Todt will be Max2? You don't have any and I have seen nothing but Todt give 100% to each management position he has held and draw great success to boot.

Spa and Suzuku are being used this year so I missed your point. I like the new Hocky, lots of passing especially at the hairpin. Canada was a loss, Turkey is a gain lets see how the other new tracks pan out.

Ari is lying because Ferrari have not publically broadcast their dislike for todt?
Ari would not publicallt state this if it wasnt true because ferrari would quickly refute it and make him look like a fool and it would cost him a lot of credibility. Hes saying the truth.

From todts own mouth. He promised to continue mosleys legacy.

I think that is a really unfair conclusion to draw, unless you conclusively know that Ferrari do not 'not want Todt' and know Vatanen also knows that ?.

There are a lot of rumours that Ferrari do not want Todt to be president, and some of them seem well founded, and the teams have publicly stated they want an independent candidate with no previous or current connection to the tams. Vatanen undoubtedly has more information than most of us as well, about this. I would look at it the other way - Ferrari know about the rumours, as does Todt, and they have not denied them.

Of course there is no way Ferrari or any team would publicly say they don't want a particular candidate as president, for the obvious reason that they may become president.

Exactly.

Such nonsense is what F1 Presidents have to not only put up with all the time, but its nonsense they have to predict as well - surely?

Ari did say that Ferrari did not want Todt - to not predict the outcome of what was his own statement, is disturbingly naive IMO. With Max, you'd wonder why he did something. For instance, when MM recommends Todt, maybe he's actually setting up Donnelly, by allowing both Ari and Todt to damage themselves. This Ari statement however just seems dumb to me.

Donnelly sitting waiting the background is a worry but if he were "elected" FOTA would just walk taking CVC with them.
But I keep wondering what was all that public handshake show between Max and Berger all about ????? and what was the real reason Berger and Toro Rosso parted company ?

Jacques Villeneuve won the 1997 world championship even though Michael Schumacher, and, it now appears, the whole Ferrari team did their very best to stop him. With Schumacher’s retirement the old stories are coming out of the woodwork. But few better, or more damning, than the one told by Norberto Fontana.

Nine years after the world championship showdown at the Spanish circuit, Jerez de la Frontera, between Jacques Villeneuve and Michael Schumacher in 1997, the then-Sauber driver Norberto Fontana has decided to tell the story of what happened to him and his part in that highly-charged weekend.

At Jerez on that day, Sunday 26th October, Fontana had qualified 18th out of 22 and gone about his weekend totally unnoticed. He was 1.3 seconds slower than his team-mate Johnny Herbert in qualifying.

But Ferrari team principal, Jean Todt, had spotted his potential in 18th place, although not for the usual reasons. In a recent interview with the daily Argentinian sports magazine Ole, the now 31-year-old Fontana claims two or three hours before the race, Todt visited the Sauber motorhome where the two drivers were having a pre-race massage.

The Swiss team used Ferrari engines at the time. What happened next shocked all those present. Todt told the three men that the Saubers must block Jacques Villeneuve’s Williams Renault if they were in a position to do so in order to help Michael Schumacher win the world championship. The order was given to Fontana and Herbert, the team’s number one driver.

In reality it was unlikely either of the Sauber drivers would have had a serious chance to block Villeneuve, but Todt apparently made it very clear what they must do it if they had. Fontana says now: “We were in Peter Sauber’s motorhome with the masseur and Johnny Herbert, softening the muscles. It was two or three hours until the race started. Jean Todt entered and went straight to the point: ‘By strict order of Ferrari, Villeneuve must be held up if you come across him on the track. To whoever this applies.’ And this applied to me.” Todt didn’t appear to know who Fontana was but realised as a slower backmarker he might have more chance to block Villeneuve than Herbert would.

It was an astonishing situation for the young driver to be in. But according to Fontana, Peter Sauber told him that whatever the morality he had little choice but to comply. Sauber had an engine contract with Ferrari, then in its first year, which obliged it to comply.

Peter Sauber has since strongly refuted this version of events in an interview with his close friend, the journalist Roger Benoit. But he cannot know for sure as he was not present in the motorhome when Todt made the request. Nevertheless, in an interview published in Blick, the Swiss daily newspaper, Sauber called Fontana a liar and vigorously denies Fontana’s claim.

Sauber told Blick that in the nine years Ferrari and Sauber worked together, the Italians never asked his team to block other drivers. He told Benoit: “Ferrari never expressed the desire that we should obstruct an opponent of Schumacher on the track.”

Benoit is a journalist of the highest regard and with the highest standards, and would have printed exactly what Sauber told him. That Sauber denies it cannot be refuted.

However the television footage appears to prove Sauber wrong rather than Fontana. It clearly shows Fontana blocking Villeneuve for three corners when he came up to be lapped on lap 32. Fontana describes how he did it: “When I came to taking a turn, I held Jacques back by three or four curves, not more.”

As well as the television footage, it is also backed up by a sequence of remarks between Murray Walker and Martin Brundle, the ITV commentators for the English-language broadcast of the event. The exchange went like this:

“Case of champagne from Ferrari to Sauber,” said Walker.

“Because the Argentinian newcomer Norberto Fontana, up from Formula Three, really, really, helped Michael Schumacher on his way there,” he added.

“What engine have they got in that Sauber, Murray?” said Brundle.

“Isn’t it a Ferrari?” he said.

“Well, it is, yes,” said Walker. “Martin you are a cynical chap.”

Walker and Brundle had no doubt what had happened, and although they didn’t know why at the time, by their comments they suspected some doubtful behaviour by Ferrari.

Fontana is adamant he did his job well and blocked Villeneuve for three or four corners and cost him around three seconds.

In the end, of course, it didn’t matter as when Villeneuve challenged Michael Schumacher for the lead, the cars collided and Schumacher got the worst of it and retired from the race and championship contention. Villeneuve won the world championship and Schumacher was later stripped of his second-place for pushing Villeneuve’s Williams Renault off the track. The race also had another controversy that enabled Todt to get away with his ruse: the Williams Renault and McLaren Mercedes openly colluded to alter the course of events, although not negatively as Todt had planned. Frank Williams agreed that if the McLaren drivers Mika Häkkinen and David Coulthard helped Villeneuve then the Canadian would hand the win to either of the McLaren drivers if he didn’t need the points at the end of the race. But this was certainly not collusion to the extent of trying to disrupt Villeneuve’s race as Fontana was ordered to do.

And there the secret would have lain if Fontana had not harnessed bitter feelings about the incident and been telephoned by a reporter from Ole to comment on Schumacher’s retirement on the evening of the 10th September 2006. The article duly appeared in the following day’s edition.

Fontana was bitter because he claimed that neither Schumacher nor Todt ever thanked him for what he did. Fontana believes the incident harmed his career and his chances of attracting another drive with another team. He says: “It was incredible at the time but already it’s history, a story.”

Fontana said he was telling the story now because time had passed and Schumacher was retiring: “Now that time has passed, I can tell the story. After all, who remembers?”

He says: “It harmed me. First, Schumacher never thanked me for it and Todt, as they lost the championship, they left the motorhomes heated and I never spoke with him again. And, months later, that situation finished me.” More than anything else, he was angry about not being thanked.

Fontana was a friend of Schumacher’s from his German Formula Three days, as he says: “We had a lot of contact when I raced in the German Formula Three, because Ralf was there.” Schumacher was once quoted as saying of Fontana: “Who is that boy? Fontana, an Argentinian? He goes very well, that boy he goes well.” Fontana remembers eating pizza with Schumacher and becoming friends.

Fontana did go on to secure a drive with Tyrrell in 1998, but after the team was bought by Craig Pollock he blocked the move. Fontana maintains it was because Pollock was Villeneuve’s manager and remembered what had happened. He explains: “Pollock finished me and gave me the thumbs down for that manoeuvre.”

Now Fontana is sanguine about the incident and ruminates about what might have led from that Tyrrell drive: “I had more to lose than to gain. I did what I had to do. But it is a done thing.”

Says it all basicly. And If Jean would ever ask for such a favour, which I'm sure is possible, he would go straight to Peter Sauber and not to the drivers. Afterall, possible deals like these are made by the top people.

It is not people that matter. It is where the line between F1 and FIA and that is not done yet . But personalisation brings the talk so everyone is focused in Mr.X and Mr.Y. instead of what matters, and what matters is that those that are in F1 manage most of it. Not the FIA.